Currently viewing the category: "Calls for Papers"

For its third issue, The Neutral is soliciting contributions for ‘The Unhuman’

The human body is already unhuman, populated by a microbiome that sustains its life, and yet, discourses of the unhuman are harnessed to draw the parameters of what it means to be human. This construction of the human depends upon what is jettisoned as unhuman in order to reaffirm the position and borders of what or who is considered human, particularly as marginalized groups are subjected to dehumanization. By the term “unhuman,” we aim to invoke an unmaking of the human or category of the human, in keeping with the proliferation of scholarship that has emerged as a response to the posthuman turn in the humanities and the rise of the anthropocene discourse, both of which have been critiqued for not fully engaging pressing issues such as colonialism, race, capitalism, disability, and more.  In this issue of The Neutral, we seek essays that address the unhuman, that think with the unhuman, and in doing so, offer ways of critiquing anthropocentrism, particularly as it is bolstered by a Western, imperialist concept of the human, through moving image media.We also seek to examine how the human is already enfolded within the unhuman, and integrated with its environment, other species, and technology, and imaginings of monstrous and alien life forms.

The distinction between the human and nonhuman animal has long troubled philosophers, including Aristotle, Descartes, Kant, and Heidegger, who have attempted to index attributes that belong to humans alone. Derrida, however, acknowledges the positionality of the animal, an animal that returns one’s gaze. He proposes to examine the relationship between species as an “abyssal rupture,” as a multiplication of differences, which also gestures towards the limitations of what the human can know, and the aporia in its knowledge of other species. And Deleuze and Guattari’s concept of “becoming-animal” which follows their rhizomatic methodology in which they counter prevailing tendencies to categorize organisms according to stable characteristics, instead, opening up to the possibilities of continually shifting relationalities. Other thinkers draw us towards the place where the border of the human collapses, including Julia Kristeva’s abject, Georges Bataille’s eroticism, and Sigmund Freud’s unconscious. Potential papers might ask: How do moving images visualize or theorize the abyssal rupture, or rhizomatic structures? How does film present vegetal or subterrestrial ontologies?

Posthumanism offers philosophical frameworks and practices that have engendered the impetus to decenter traditional human subjectivity and subjecthood, marked temporally as coming after humanism and its search for an essential, universal human subject with sovereign agency. However, the turn towards the study of nonhuman life forms is a premature move for scholars such as Sylvia Wynter and Paul Gilroy, who rightly point out that racialized persons are still struggling to attain recognition of their rights as humans. Afropessimists like Frank B. Wilderson III go further still in asserting that the human is given coherence by anti-Blackness and that the Black/human relation is structurally irreconcilable. Meanwhile, scholars such as Mel Y. Chen take up questions of the nonhuman to illuminate new perspectives on racialized, queer, and differently abled bodies. Potential papers might ask: What limitations or illuminations do discourses of animality, monstrosity, or technologization hold for marginalized populations, and how does moving image media navigate these tensions?

Posthumanism is also symptomatic of a convergence of anti-humanism, post-humanism and post-anthropocentrism within the technological and digital age. Norbert Wiener’s cybernetics or using feedback as a way to communicate with the inhuman produces potentials of understanding technology as systems of interactions. Recognizing sense organs as key components in relations between machine and multispecies life, the use of systems enables a bounded relation of humans, ecology, and machines. Richard Grusin, more recently, in his anthology named The Nonhuman Turn (2015), invites proponents of posthumanism and new materialism to consider that which falls outside the domain of ‘human’ altogether. Contemporary scholarship that emerged in recent years which engages the “other-than-human” often maintains that the continuum between bodies human and nonhuman has been eroded by our ever-increasing entanglements with technology. Yet, it also seems to gesture at the idea that the nonhuman has ultimately always resided within the human. How can we begin to address the ways in which this scholarship remains problematic, for its attempts to expand the prescribed categories of human still perform exclusion? Have we indeed moved past humanism, or simply reworked its main tenets so that it can begin to account for our contemporary moment?

As the representations of what defies “normality,” monsters are aberrations of the human, and such become the site upon which humans work out their anxieties about sexuality, gender, and race. Monstrosity also offers ways of re-examining what constitutes the human, as Jeffrey Jerome Cohen’s “zombie-oriented ontology” emphasizes human corporeality, and thinks through the body as a vessel that has been emptied of its subjecthood. Science fiction also grapples with unhuman life forms, presenting imaginative possibilities of what extra-terrestrial beings might be, from the malevolent forces of epics disaster films to a more nuanced approach that considers the alien as communicating an understanding about what it means to be earthly, to be human, and the human’s responsibilities to its planet. Potential papers might ask: How might we understand horror, sci-fi, and ecocinema in light of thinking beyond the human? What do speculative fictions help us understand about the limitations of being human?

For this issue, ultimately, we ask: What role(s) do film and moving image media play in the construction and/or conceptualization of the unhuman? How does it emerge as both a condition and a discourse? How have the ontological and epistemological pressures that animate the “unhuman” been facilitated, crystallized, and/or reflected by media? 

Please submit completed essays between 5,000-7,000 words in length, including endnotes and citations, as a Word document in Chicago style by registering on our website’s submission portal by July 15, 2021.

 


 

Version Française

Pour son troisième numéro, The Neutral sollicite des contributions pour ‘The Unhuman’

La distinction entre l’animal humain et non-humain a longtemps troublé les philosophes, dont Aristote, Descartes, Kant et Heidegger, qui ont tenté d’indexer des attributs qui n’appartiennent qu’aux humains. Derrida, cependant, reconnaît la positionnalité de l’animal, un animal qui renvoie le regard. Il propose d’examiner la relation entre les espèces comme une « rupture abyssale », comme une multiplication des différences, ce qui signale aussi limites de ce que l’homme peut savoir, et l’aporie dans sa connaissance des autres espèces. Et le concept de « devenir-animal » de Deleuze et Guattari qui suit leur méthodologie rhizomatique dans laquelle ils contrarient les tendances dominantes à catégoriser les organismes selon des caractéristiques stables, ouvrant au contraire les possibilités de relationalités en constante évolution. D’autres penseurs nous entraînent vers là où la frontière de l’humain s’effondre, notamment l’abject de Julia Kristeva, l’érotisme de Georges Bataille et l’inconscient de Sigmund Freud. Des articles potentiels pourraient demander: comment les images en mouvement visualisent-elles ou théorisent-elles la rupture abyssale ou les structures rhizomatiques? Comment le film présente-t-il des ontologies végétales ou souterraines?

Le posthumanisme offre des cadres et des pratiques philosophiques qui ont engendré l’élan pour décentrer les subjectivités humaines traditionnelles et la subjectivité elle-même, marquées temporellement comme venant après l’humanisme et sa recherche d’un sujet humain essentiel et universel avec une action souveraine. Cependant, le tournant vers l’étude des formes de vie non humaines est une décision prématurée pour des universitaires tels que Sylvia Wynter et Paul Gilroy, qui soulignent à juste titre que les personnes racialisées ont encore du mal à obtenir la reconnaissance de leurs droits en tant qu’êtres humains. Des « Afro-pessimistes » (issue de l’Afropessimism) comme Frank B. Wilderson III vont encore plus loin en affirmant que c’est l’anti-noirceur qui rend l’humain cohérent et que la relation Noir / humain est structurellement inconciliable. Pendant ce temps, des chercheurs tels que Mel Y. Chen abordent les questions du non-humain pour éclairer de nouvelles perspectives sur les corps racialisés, queer et ayant des capacités différentes et/ou handicaps. Des articles potentiels pourraient demander: quelles limites ou potentiels éclairages les discours sur l’animalité, la monstruosité ou la « technologisation » présentent-ils pour les populations marginalisées, et comment les images en mouvement permettent-elles de surmonter ces tensions?

Le posthumanisme est également symptomatique d’une convergence de l’antihumanisme, du post-humanisme et du post-anthropocentrisme à l’ère technologique et numérique. La cybernétique de Norbert Wiener ou l’utilisation du feedback comme moyen de communiquer avec l’inhumain produit des potentiels de compréhension de la technologie en tant que systèmes d’interactions. Reconnaissant les organes sensoriels comme des éléments clés dans les relations entre la vie des machines et la vie multi-espèces, l’utilisation de systèmes permet une relation délimitée entre les humains, l’écologie et les machines. Richard Grusin, plus récemment, dans son anthologie intitulée The Nonhuman Turn (2015), invite les partisans du posthumanisme et du nouveau matérialisme à considérer ce qui ne relève pas du domaine de « l’humain ». La recherche contemporaine qui a émergé ces dernières années et qui engage « l’autre qu’humain » soutient souvent que le continuum entre les corps humains et non humains a été érodé par nos enchevêtrements toujours croissants avec la technologie. Pourtant, elle semble également suggérer l’idée que le non-humain a finalement et ultimement toujours résidé dans l’humain. Comment pouvons-nous commencer à aborder la manière dont ces courants et discours académiques restent problématiques, car leurs tentatives d’élargir les catégories prescrites d’humains continuent d’exclure? Avons-nous en effet dépassé l’humanisme, ou simplement retravaillé ses principes fondamentaux pour qu’il puisse commencer à rendre compte de notre moment contemporain?

En tant que représentations de ce qui défie la « normalité », les monstres sont des aberrations de l’humain et deviennent ainsi le site sur lequel les humains développent leurs inquiétudes concernant la sexualité, le sexe et la race. La monstruosité offre également des moyens de réexaminer ce qui constitue l’humain, car « l’ontologie orientée zombie » ou « zombie oriented ontology » (dans son anglais original) de Jeffrey Jerome Cohen met l’accent sur la corporéité humaine et pense à travers le corps comme un vaisseau vidé de sa subjectivité. La science-fiction engage aussi des formes de vie inhumaines, présentant des possibilités imaginatives de ce que pourraient être les êtres extraterrestres, des forces malveillantes des films catastrophes et épiques, à une approche plus nuancée qui considère l’extraterrestre comme communiquant une compréhension de ce que signifie être terrestre, être humain, et les responsabilités de l’homme envers sa planète. Des articles potentiels pourraient demander: Comment pourrions-nous comprendre l’horreur, la science-fiction et l’écocinéma à la lumière d’une pensée qui va au-delà de l’humain? Qu’est-ce que les fictions spéculatives nous aident à comprendre sur les limites de l’être humain?

Pour ce numéro, ultimement, nous demandons: quel (s) rôle (s) les médias cinématographiques et de l’image animé jouent-ils dans la construction et / ou la conceptualisation du un-humain? Comment émerge-t-il à la fois comme condition et comme discours? Comment les pressions ontologiques et épistémologiques qui animent le un-humain sont-elles facilitées, cristallisées et / ou reflétées par les médias?

Veuillez soumettre les articles composés entre 5 000 et 7 000 mots, y compris les notes de fin et les citations sous forme de document Word dans le style de Chicago à submission portal avant le 15 juillet 2021.

Tagged with:
 

First Forum Graduate Student Conference 2021
October 21, 22, 28, & 29
Division of Cinema and Media Studies
School of Cinematic Arts, University of Southern California

 
POST(ING) CALL FOR PROPOSALS

We’re posting through it. All of it.
  • posting on social media
  • trolling and shit-posting
  • post-theoretical paradigms and movements
  • digital labor, content moderation and algorithms
  • the postal service and infrastructure
  • fans and celebrities
  • posters and physical media
  • going postal
  • doomscrolling and attention economies
  • the post-network TV era
  • post-Covid-19
  • bots and computation
  • publics and publicity
  • signposting and speech acts
  • Postmates and gig economies
  • outposts, fence posts, and borders
  • post-production
  • posting through it
  • job posts and impostor syndrome

 

Our Call for Posts — The organizing committee of the 2021 First Forum Graduate Student Conference invites our fellow graduate student scholars to submit abstracts that explore the wide range of meanings suggested by the word “posting” as it relates to the fields of cinema and media studies, communication, gender and sexuality studies, ethnic studies, and science and technology studies.

While posting might immediately refer to the work of participating in digital networks and the increasingly visible labor, affect, and resources that participation demands, we invite submissions that touch upon a range of mediums, methodologies, and approaches, from post-production to the postal service. “Post-“ might suggest the numerous post-intellectual moments scholars speculate we have been entering and exiting since the 1970s. Yet, even the formation of these post-modern, feminist, racial, historical moments themselves have been called into question, leading some to ask if we are now in the post-post-modern, the post-post-feminist era or if there was anything “new” about these moments in the first place. Meanwhile, many of us try to imagine a post-Covid era as old and new social arrangements struggle to emerge. The tireless Twitter troll and commenter on the human condition @Dril asks us to consider “posting ethically, within reason,” a position the organizing committee asks applicants to take seriously as they reflect on the multivalent meanings of “posting.” Clearly, the novel social, historical, and political arrangements that make posting and the “post-” meaningful are being reevaluated by people across a wide range of contexts that invite scholarly attention and interrogation.
 
In order to encourage attendance, reduce burnout, and ensure the health and safety of participants, students, and the broader Los Angeles community, First Forum 2021 will be a virtual conference, with panels and events held over two weeks on October 21, 22, 28, and 29.
 
Submissions should include an abstract (-300 words) and a short biography (-150 words). Conference presentations will be 15-20 minutes. Applicants must submit their materials by June 9, 2021 to firstforumconference@gmail.com. Please include “Name + First Forum 2021 Submission” in the subject line. We warmly welcome non-traditional projects, including but not limited to, video essays and art exhibitions alongside traditional academic papers.
 
The UC Santa Barbara Media Fields Collective is excited to announce the call for papers for issue 17 of Media Fields: Critical Explorations of Media in Space.


Please email submissions to submissions@mediafieldsjournal.org by June 4, 2021.
You can review our submission guidelines at mediafieldsjournal.org.



Call for Submissions

Modularity and Modification
Media Fields: Critical Explorations of Media in Space, Issue 17


To move, media must be flexible. Think, for instance, of the remarkably consistent form of the upscale multiplex that has made a home for global blockbuster cinema in China, Mexico, India, Belgium, and Canada alike. Or consider the efforts of communities who have had to salvage, appropriate, and alter telecommunications infrastructure—developing their own technical expertise in the process—in an effort to bring internet connectivity to remote areas neglected by corporate service providers. While distinct, these examples each raise the question of how media flexibility is underpinned by the tension between modularity and modification.

Modularity involves the repetition, standardization, and recombination of existing forms: exhibitors use the standard form of the multiplex to signify the “world-class” status of their up-to-date cinemas, while amateur technicians rely on widely used antennas, wires, and protocols to plug into existing internet infrastructure. Conversely, modification calls on the ability to adapt given materials (including technologies, practices, ideas, and senses of self) to prevailing conditions: theatre chains grapple with issues of urban development, audiences, and taste cultures as they develop new sites in new locales, while communities adapt technology to the resources they have, the landscapes they inhabit, and the histories they share to make their projects work. In these and other examples, media forge the channels along which modular elements can be disseminated and within which opportunities for modification take root.

Considering these concepts as an entry point for the study of media in space immediately conjures associations with Michel de Certeau’s opposition between strategy and tactics. If modularity offers the opportunity to expand the “proper place” of the powerful and extend the imposed terrain on which the subjected must move, modification suggests the potential to rework that terrain along tactical lines. The modularity of communication infrastructures and media forms might suggest narratives of spatial and temporal compression and, in turn, buttress colonial narratives that render distant, foreign spaces more legible, accessible, or profitable for powerful interests. Conversely, the modification of modular media genres, formats, technologies, and environments evokes profuse examples of narratives of localized or regionalized difference, adaptation, resistance, and even refusal.

Such associations between modularity, modification, power, and resistance do not hold seamlessly, and are useful only to the extent that they are contextualized and questioned. Media scholarship that engages in this work does not necessarily dispense with familiar associations with these concepts but expose the frictions and counternarratives that arise out of close, critical analysis. Reconsidering these associations raises questions including: What are productive ways of conceptualizing modification without fetishizing neoliberal concepts of ingenuity that displace the responsibilities of media institutions and telecommunications services onto individuals? How might we understand corporate modularity as involving forms of differentiation that enable flows of capital and hegemony? Where can we see the activities of user or audience modification being channeled or controlled by powerful interests? In what ways does modularity emerge from individuals, social groups, and communities rather than being imposed on them? Can we uncover or recover cases that subvert binaries associating modularity with the homogenous, the corporate, and the global and modification with the heterogenous, the individual, and the local?

The Media Fields Editorial Collective in the Department of Film and Media at the University of California, Santa Barbara seeks papers that interrogate the imbrication of modularity and modification in spatial practices and imaginaries and put forward thought-provoking examples of how they might be operationalized in the service of today’s media scholarship.

Potential paper topics include, but are not limited to:

  • Technological standards and standardization
  • Circulating genres and formats
  • Digital “modding”
  • Film and television “packaging”
  • Franchises, sequels, spinoffs, ripoffs, and reboots
  • Platform systems and their users
  • Communication infrastructures and their nodes

Tagged with:
 

Canadian Journal of Film Studies – Call for Papers

Special Issue: 16mm and Canadian Film

(Version française ci-bas)

This history of Canadian Cinema is impossible to disentangle from the specific dynamics of the cameras, films, projectors and institutions that constitute the shifting dynamics of what we often just call “16.” Standardized in 1923, this smaller, non-flammable, portable apparatus became the global backbone of a vast range of film practices: amateur, experimental, military, industrial, educational, governmental, religious.  As a distribution and performance platform, 16mm films and projectors normalized the place of film in Canadian classrooms, government offices, civic organizations and factories as early as the 1930s, fundamentally shaping how the nation, and its conflicts, would sound and appear thereafter. As a technology of making, 16mm transformed amateur, art/experimental, community, and televisual practices for decades. We invite papers that consider the specifically Canadian legacies of 16mm film, understood capaciously as a family of technologies, practices, institutions, filmmakers, programmers, viewers, and films. Topics may include distribution circuits and film libraries, amateur, educational and industrial films; the legacy of 16mm in direct cinema and the NFB/ONF;  the role of 16mm in expanded cinema and experimental forms; its role in Canadian television; practices of the military and government; LGBTQ2+ filmmaking, activism, viewing cultures; 16mm and colonial/settler-colonial/anti-colonialism/anti-racism; and 16mm’s rich image archive as materials for reconceptualizing the past, present and future. Essays on 16mm as found footage, raw material or hand-processed art are also welcome.

 

In order to accommodate as many kinds of contributions as possible, we are open to essays of varied length and approach. Proposals should be approximately 300 words, indicate anticipated length, include a short bio and should be submitted no later than May 15th, 2021. Contributors will be notified by June 1, 2021 and articles will be due November 30th, 2021.  We aim to have this issue out as part of the mounting interest in the 100th anniversary of the 16mm standard.

 

Send to issue Co-editors:

 

Liz Czach (liz.czach@ualberta.ca)

Associate Professor,  English and Film Studies, University of Alberta

 

Haidee Wasson (haidee.wasson@concordia.ca)

Professor, Film and Media Studies, Concordia University, Montreal


Revue canadienne d’études cinématographiques – Appel à contributions

Numéro spécial: 16 mm et cinéma canadien

L’histoire du cinéma canadien est intimement liée à une corrélation singulièrement entre caméra, format filmique, et projecteur interagissant au sein d’institutions qui ont façonné la dynamique de ce que l’on appelle communément le 16mm. Standardisé en 1923, la petite caméra 16mm portable, avec sa pellicule ininflammable, devint l’épine dorsale mondiale d’une ample gamme de pratiques cinématographiques: amateur, expérimentale, militaire, industrielle, éducative, gouvernementale, religieuse. Comme plateforme de distribution et de projection, le 16 mm a normalisé l’utilisation du cinéma dans les salles de classe, les bureaux gouvernementaux, les organisations civiques et les usines du Canada dès les années 1930, influençant fondamentalement la façon dont la nation (et ses conflits) apparaîtrait désormais en son et images. En tant que technologie de production, le 16 mm a transformé les pratiques amateurs, artistiques/expérimentales, communautaires et télévisuelles pendant des décennies.

Nous invitons les chercheurs intéressés à soumettre des articles qui étudient l’héritage spécifiquement canadien du 16 mm, compris au sens large comme un vaste ensemble de technologies, de pratiques, d’institutions, de cinéastes, de programmeurs, de téléspectateurs et de films. Les sujets peuvent inclure :

  • les circuits de distribution et les cinémathèques, les films amateurs, éducatifs et industriels;
  • l’héritage du 16 mm à l’ONF, en particulier dans l’évolution du cinéma direct;
  • le rôle du 16 mm dans le cinéma élargi et les formes expérimentales, à la télévision, ou  à des fins militaires et gouvernementales;
  • format de prédilection pour la réalisation de films LGBTQ2 +, de films activistes, de films culturels;
  • le 16 mm et le colonialisme, l’anticolonialisme et l’antiracisme;
  • l’image d’archives comme matériaux de base pour reconceptualiser le passé, le présent et le futur, ou la pellicule 16mm recyclée, manipulée, peinte ou griffonnée.

 

Afin d’inclure l’éventail de contributions le plus large possible, nous accepterons des articles de longueur et d’approche variées. Les propositions d’environ 300 mots doivent indiquer la longueur prévue de l’article complété et être soumises au plus tard le 15 mai 2021. Veuillez aussi inclure une brève biographie. Les auteurs dont les propositions auront été sélectionnées seront informés avant le 1er juin 2021. Les articles complétés doivent être soumis avant le 30 novembre 2021. Nous espérons que ce numéro spécial sera publié à temps pour célébrer le 100e anniversaire du 16mm en 2023

Veuillez envoyer vos propositions aux deux éditrices invitées:

Liz Czach (liz.czach@ualberta.ca)

Professeure associée, Études anglaises et cinématographiques,

Université de l’Alberta, Edmonton

 

Haidee Wasson (haidee.wasson@concordia.ca)

Professeure, Études cinématographiques et médiatiques,

Université Concordia, Montréal

 

CfP: Science and the Moving Image: Histories of Intermediality 

Location: Online (Zoom)

Date: November 2nd and 3rd PM (UK time), 2021

 

Since the advent of film in the late nineteenth century, moving images have been integral to making and communicating science. A rich interdisciplinary literature has examined such representations of science in the cinema and on television and investigated how scientists have used moving images to conduct research and communicate knowledge. Responding to growing interest in science and the moving image, this online workshop uses the concept of ‘intermediality’ as a starting point to discuss new approaches and methodologies. Intermediality, coined by media scholars to describe the interplay between different media, magnifies their multiple meanings and heterogenous interrelations. Moving images especially invite intermedial analysis because they are often composed of interrelated visuals, speech, music, and text; film can also be cut into stills for reproduction in newspapers, advertisements, and journals. Intermedial approaches thus allow scholars to assess not only the relationship between scientific practices and media forms, but also the afterlives, circulation, and reception of these media in a richer historical context. With its attention to relations and movement between media, intermediality also expands our understanding of the visual cultures of science, including in parts of the world and among groups that are underrepresented in current scholarship. We particularly invite submissions that use intermediality to engage critically with the scope and limits of science and the moving image.

 

Possible themes might include:

  • Processes of translation between different media, including film, television, radio, and print
  • Intermedial practices and histories of specific scientific disciplines
  • Moving images in science education
  • Transnational and comparative approaches to scientific image-making
  • Time-lapse, frame-by-frame analysis, and other analytical methods as intermedial practices
  • Representations of science in multimedia entertainment industries
  • The relationship between moving images of science and the history of empire and colonization
  • Amateur uses of moving image media, including citizen science
  • The cultural reproduction through scientific images of gender, race, and class. 

 

Keynote speaker: Dr. Tim Boon (Head of Research and Public History, Science Museum Group)

We welcome talks from postgraduate students, early-career researchers and established scholars. We are looking for abstracts (max. 250 words) for 15-20 minute talks, which will be arranged in thematic panels. Submissions should be sent to movingimagescience@gmail.com. The deadline for proposals is June 28th, 2021 and we aim to respond to proposals within four weeks.

This workshop will take place online via Zoom and is hosted by postgraduate members of the Department of History and Philosophy of Science and the Faculty of History, University of Cambridge.

Organised by: Miles Kempton, Max Long, Anin Luo

 

100 Years of 16mm – Call for Papers

With its devices and materials largely consigned to archives, storage closets, and junk shops, it is easy to forget that 16mm was – for over 50 years – a major global media infrastructure. Considered an ascendant technological platform from the 1920s onward, 16mm was a suite of hardware and software that rapidly wended its way into the operations of government, industry, business, military, schools, museums, and homes. Sold as an amateur’s delight, a mighty military tool of operations, a miraculous business solution and a community organizing device, it transformed realms large and small, public and private, local and global. By mid-century, millions of 16mm cameras and projectors had launched countless new audio-visual forms and created everyday interfaces that reshaped how and what people would see and hear. New kinds of content arose, which appeared in remote as well as common places. Audiences morphed; They could be as small as one but as big as the formal and informal networks that grew to connect them.  Colonialist, imperialist, nationalist, and multi-nationalist institutions arose using this non-flammable, highly portable film format. Artists and activists also engaged these small affordable media machines establishing other, and sometimes, counter-pathways. Standardized in 1923, 16mm technologies, institutions, and practices constituted a primary and dominant media substrate for more than half a century, enabling a vast arena of film and media activity.

 

It’s time for a more fulsome assessment of its legacies.

 

This IN FOCUS  (Journal of Cinema and Media Studies) invites proposals for essays addressing the crucial, generative, and transformative history of 16mm film as a tool of making, storing, preserving, distributing, and showing moving images and sounds.  For almost 100 years, this uniquely important film format has upended and reshaped a vast realm of creative, political, governmental, sexual, educational, recreational, informational, and experimental activity. This dossier begins a conversation about its histories and impact, working to catalyze a fuller understanding of this particular moving image/sound infrastructure and the many practices and expressive forms it enabled.  Mapping its lasting, diverse and global impacts will be a priority of this IN FOCUS feature. Contributions may take the form of case studies or surveys, conceptual explorations, formal/artistic examinations, or institutional and technological studies.

 

Please share a brief 150-word abstract or statement of interest by March 31, 2021.

 

Send to: Haidee Wasson (haidee.wasson@concordia.ca)

Professor, Film and Media Studies, Concordia University, Montreal

 

Final Essays: 2500 words; due January 1, 2022

 

Tagged with:
 

Besides the Screen: Geographies, Spaces, and Places Outside the Screen 

University of Nottingham Ningbo China (UNNC), June 10-12, 2021

 

Conference Organisers: 

Dr. Virginia Crisp, Senior Lecturer in Culture, Media & Creative Industries, King’s College, London (UK)

Dr. Gabriel Menotti, Assistant Professor in the Film & Media Department, Queen’s University (Canada)

Dr. Corey Schultz, Associate Professor in the School of International Communications, University of Nottingham Ningbo China

 

Website: https://besidesthescreen.com 

 

CFP deadline: April 9, 2021 

As a conclusion to the (slightly delayed) Besides the Screen 10th Anniversary programme of events, the 2021 conference builds upon the network’s previous work examining the continuing transformations of audiovisual practice, to investigate the reconfigurations of screen industries, cultures, spaces and places through examining sites of production, infrastructures of circulation, film festivals, film tourism, and city branding. In short, the way place/space intersects with the multiple sites of production, circulation, promotion and consumption surrounding screen (incl. Film/TV, games, interactive arts) industries and cultures. The conference will explore the more established scholarship related to these topics (film festivals, city branding, transnational co-production, film/TV tourism) as well as expanding the conversation to represent the newly established or emerging topics (e-sports, virtual concerts). 

The conference will be a hybrid (physical/virtual) event hosted by the School of International Communications at the University of Nottingham Ningbo China (CN), in partnership with King’s College, London (UK) and Queen’s University (CA). As ever with BtSN events, the theme of the conference is deliberately expansive to bring together interdisciplinary perspectives and we welcome scholars emerging and established to submit proposals for papers, video essays, and short films dealing with topics such as: 

  • Sites of production, promotion, and consumption 
  • Infrastructures of circulation  
  • Transnational co-productions 
  • Media festivals and theatrical exhibition  
  • Film festivals 
  • E-sports 
  • Virtual events / concerts 
  • Film tourism 
  • Screen media and city branding 

 

Submission Details: 

 

Paper proposals should be made via the online form on the website –https://besidesthescreen.com – and require the following information: 

  • abstract (under 300 words); 
  • 3-5 keywords; 
  • short biography (150 – 200 words); 
  • your time zone (NB: the conference will take place in Beijing Standard Time and so we will consider time zones when scheduling real-time panel discussions); 
  • whether you would prefer an in-person or pre-recorded presentation (due to current COVID-19 travel restrictions, we strongly anticipate that people from outside China won’t be able to attend in person). 

Video essay and short film submissions (under 20 minutes) should be made via the online form and require the following information:  

  • a link to the film/video essay;  
  • a short summary (under 300 words); 
  • 3-5 keywords; 
  • biography (150 – 200 words).   

If you experience any issues with the submission form please email besidesthescreen@gmail.com with the email header NINGBO21 – Submission issue. Please note, email submissions will not be accepted. 

Deadline – April 9, 2021. We will accept submissions up to midnight in the proposer’s timezone. 

 

Call for Papers:

Reframing the Nation: Diasporic Racialized, Indigenous & Queer BIPOC Canadian Independent Women Filmmakers 1990-2020.

 

Reframing the Nation is the first critical film anthology from an intersectional Canadian context that is dedicated to a close engagement with impactful films produced by racialized diasporic, indigenous, and Queer BIPOC independent women filmmakers in Canada. This collection charts the cinematic visions and perspectives of first and second generation diasporic and indigenous filmmakers and Queer BIack, Indigenous, Women of Colour Canadian Independent Women Filmmakers working from 1990-2020. Works considered can be shorts or features that are independent Canadian productions. Independent films tend to reflect artistic practices that are rooted in personal, political, aesthetic, cultural, philosophical, and social justice concerns, they are typically arts council funded and/or co-produced with other agencies. A vital component of independent film is that the filmmaker maintains artistic/editorial control over their work. Comparative papers between Canadian productions and international productions are welcome.

 

Please Submit Abstracts (300 words) & short bio (125 words) up until April 15, 2021
Notification of acceptance: within three weeks of receipt of the abstract.
Submission of Papers: 15-20 pages preferred, to a maximum of 5,000 words.
Final Draft Due: by December 15, 2021. (deadline extended due to pandemic).

Contributions from any doctoral candidates, pre-tenure and tenured faculty doing research in the areas of this collection are welcome.
Inquiries to Contributing Editor: Dr. Michelle Mohabeer (Lecturer & Filmmaker) mmohabee@yorku.ca

 

Submissions may consider the following: 

  • Documentary and Narrative features, short films, hybrid films or activist documentaries with thoughtful approaches. Oppositional and Fringe works also welcome.
  • Analyses of intersectional representations of social justice issues or settler nation.
  • Cultural identities and diasporic aesthetics: the merging of aesthetics and politics; to explore geographies of space/place, fragmented uprooted identities, home and belonging, intersectional identities, politics of displacement, memory and history, contesting dominant narratives of Canada as a nation etc.
  • Theorizing and analyzing diasporic works by Canadian racialized women or queer/trans women of colour, black and indigenous women filmmakers from decolonial, post-colonial, queer diasporic or transnational contexts.
  • Thematic or textual analysis of feature films or (body of short films) by sole or multiple BIPOC women filmmakers.
  • Aesthetic/formal approaches in documentary, narrative, experimental, and hybrid films (all genres and platforms considered)
  • Historiography of film/video by BIPOC women filmmakers in Canada (1990-2020)
  • Festivals & Distributors: supporting works by Indigenous women & women of colour filmmakers in Canada. Also BIPOC Organizations that support film/media arts.
  • Reception/audience studies of works produced by Indigenous/women of colour in Canada.
  • The decolonial use of technologies (digital and film) in works by Canadian racialized/queer diasporic and Indigenous women filmmakers.
  • Queer & Transgender films by Indigenous and women of colour filmmakers in Canada.
 
The UC Santa Barbara Media Fields Collective is excited to announce the call for papers for issue 17 of Media Fields: Critical Explorations of Media in Space.


Please email submissions to submissions@mediafieldsjournal.org by May 7, 2021.
You can review our submission guidelines at mediafieldsjournal.org.



Call for Submissions

Modularity and Modification
Media Fields: Critical Explorations of Media in Space, Issue 17


To move, media must be flexible. Think, for instance, of the remarkably consistent form of the upscale multiplex that has made a home for global blockbuster cinema in China, Mexico, India, Belgium, and Canada alike. Or consider the efforts of communities who have had to salvage, appropriate, and alter telecommunications infrastructure—developing their own technical expertise in the process—in an effort to bring internet connectivity to remote areas neglected by corporate service providers. While distinct, these examples each raise the question of how media flexibility is underpinned by the tension between modularity and modification.

Modularity involves the repetition, standardization, and recombination of existing forms: exhibitors use the standard form of the multiplex to signify the “world-class” status of their up-to-date cinemas, while amateur technicians rely on widely used antennas, wires, and protocols to plug into existing internet infrastructure. Conversely, modification calls on the ability to adapt given materials (including technologies, practices, ideas, and senses of self) to prevailing conditions: theatre chains grapple with issues of urban development, audiences, and taste cultures as they develop new sites in new locales, while communities adapt technology to the resources they have, the landscapes they inhabit, and the histories they share to make their projects work. In these and other examples, media forge the channels along which modular elements can be disseminated and within which opportunities for modification take root.

Considering these concepts as an entry point for the study of media in space immediately conjures associations with Michel de Certeau’s opposition between strategy and tactics. If modularity offers the opportunity to expand the “proper place” of the powerful and extend the imposed terrain on which the subjected must move, modification suggests the potential to rework that terrain along tactical lines. The modularity of communication infrastructures and media forms might suggest narratives of spatial and temporal compression and, in turn, buttress colonial narratives that render distant, foreign spaces more legible, accessible, or profitable for powerful interests. Conversely, the modification of modular media genres, formats, technologies, and environments evokes profuse examples of narratives of localized or regionalized difference, adaptation, resistance, and even refusal.

Such associations between modularity, modification, power, and resistance do not hold seamlessly, and are useful only to the extent that they are contextualized and questioned. Media scholarship that engages in this work does not necessarily dispense with familiar associations with these concepts but expose the frictions and counternarratives that arise out of close, critical analysis. Reconsidering these associations raises questions including: What are productive ways of conceptualizing modification without fetishizing neoliberal concepts of ingenuity that displace the responsibilities of media institutions and telecommunications services onto individuals? How might we understand corporate modularity as involving forms of differentiation that enable flows of capital and hegemony? Where can we see the activities of user or audience modification being channeled or controlled by powerful interests? In what ways does modularity emerge from individuals, social groups, and communities rather than being imposed on them? Can we uncover or recover cases that subvert binaries associating modularity with the homogenous, the corporate, and the global and modification with the heterogenous, the individual, and the local?

The Media Fields Editorial Collective in the Department of Film and Media at the University of California, Santa Barbara seeks papers that interrogate the imbrication of modularity and modification in spatial practices and imaginaries and put forward thought-provoking examples of how they might be operationalized in the service of today’s media scholarship.

Potential paper topics include, but are not limited to:

  • Technological standards and standardization
  • Circulating genres and formats
  • Digital “modding”
  • Film and television “packaging”
  • Franchises, sequels, spinoffs, ripoffs, and reboots
  • Platform systems and their users
  • Communication infrastructures and their nodes
 
 
Mary Michael and Charlotte Orzel
Issue Co-Editors
Media Fields Journal
Tagged with:
 

The Kardashians and Trans Femininity: Appropriation, Artificiality, and Racial Erasure”

Dossier for TSQ*Now

Edited by Dr. Laura Stamm (University of Pittsburgh)

 

With Keeping Up With the Kardashians ending after 19 seasons, it seems timely to reflect upon the ways in which the Kardashian aesthetic transformation has been influenced by (and appropriated) trans femininity. This dossier will ideally include both paranoid and reparative readings. For, as much as Kardashian femininity could not exist without trans femininity, perhaps there is a way in which the Kardashian women have also made trans femininity increasingly possible. What I mean is that the drag queen, trans feminine aesthetic that the Kardashian women have so spectacularly appropriated has also changed the way we conceive of cis femininity as tied to any sort of aesthetic of authenticity. Taken even further, could we create a genealogy of contemporary trans femininity through a reading of the Kardashians? How can we put questions of race at the center of this trans-femme-cis-femme circuit? 

 

Topics may include (but are not limited to):

  • Critical race studies
  • Trans of color critique
  • TV studies
  • Drag culture
  • Body-as-technology critique
  • Personal narrative
  • Social media technology

 

I am seeking contributions for a dossier for TSQ*Now, an online forum on trans studies organized by the TSQ editorial collective. The forum allows scholars to respond to currents issues with more immediacy and flexibility than traditional academic publishing. I am interested in hearing from scholars of any rank, and I especially encourage trans scholars to submit.

 

Interested writers should submit a 150-200 word abstract and a brief bio with affiliation and contact information to laura.e.stamm@gmail.com by February 1st. I am also happy to answer any questions. 

Tagged with: